The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Oswald Parada United States Magistrate Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court now rules as follows with respect to the two disputed issues*fn1 listed in the Joint Stipulation ("JS").*fn2
As reflected in the Joint Stipulation, the disputed issues raised by Plaintiff as the grounds for reversal and/or remand are as follows:
(1) Whether the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") properly considered Plaintiff's credibility; and
(2) Whether the ALJ properly considered the testimony of Plaintiff's wife.
Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), this Court reviews the Commissioner's decision to determine whether the Commissioner's findings are supported by substantial evidence and whether the proper legal standards were applied. DeLorme v. Sullivan, 924 F.2d 841, 846 (9th Cir. 1991). Substantial evidence means "more than a mere scintilla" but less than a preponderance. Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401, 91 S. Ct. 1420, 28 L. Ed. 2d 842 (1971); Desrosiers v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 846 F.2d 573, 575-76 (9th Cir. 1988). Substantial evidence is "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Perales, 402 U.S. at 401 (citation omitted). The Court must review the record as a whole and consider adverse as well as supporting evidence. Green v. Heckler, 803 F.2d 528, 529-30 (9th Cir. 1986). Where evidence is susceptible of more than one rational interpretation, the Commissioner's decision must be upheld. Gallant v. Heckler, 753 F.2d 1450, 1452 (9th Cir. 1984).
The ALJ found that Plaintiff has the following severe impairments: morbid obesity, sleep apnea, diabetes mellitus, affective mood disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, and edema. (Administrative Record ("AR") at 15.) The ALJ concluded that Plaintiff retains the residual functional capacity ("RFC") to perform medium work with the following limitations: lift and/or carry twenty-five pounds frequently and fifty pounds occasionally; stand and/or walk for four hours in an eight-hour workday; sit for six hours in an eight-hour workday; must be close to a bathroom; and can do simple and repetitive tasks but cannot have contact with the public and can only have non-intense contact with co-workers and supervisors. (Id. at 16.)
To determine the extent to which Plaintiff's limitations eroded his ability to perform the full range of medium work, the ALJ asked the vocational expert ("VE") whether jobs exist in the national economy for an individual with Plaintiff's age, education, work experience, and RFC. (Id. at 21.) Based on the testimony of the VE, the ALJ determined Plaintiff could make a successful adjustment to other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy. (Id.) Thus, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff has not been under a disability as defined by the Social Security Act. (Id.)
B. The ALJ Properly Evaluated Plaintiff's Credibility.
Plaintiff asserts that the ALJ failed to provide clear and convincing reasons for rejecting his excess pain testimony. ...